Supreme Court Balances Custody Dispute with Virtual Visitation for Non-Custodial Parent.


02-September-2025 Civil Appeals >> Civil & Consumer Law  

The Supreme Court has issued its verdict in a delicate child custody case between estranged Haryana parents, with attention on what is best for the nine-year-old boy who is currently with his mother in Ireland.

Background of the Dispute:

The case of Manoj Dhankar v/s Neeharika & Others is based on an old matrimonial discord. The parents got married in November 2012, and the son was born in January 2016. In 2017, the mother deserted the matrimonial house and thereafter filed for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The father, on his part, filed proceedings for custody in 2018.
 
 

The Family Court initially granted the father restricted visitation rights, allowing him to see the child twice a month at the school where the child was studying. The mutual settlement efforts in 2019 also did not work, after which the father sought custody through the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890.

In 2022, the Family Court granted the weekend custody to the father but prohibited him from taking the child outside Rohtak. Yet in 2023, the Family Court rejected his petition on the grounds of breaches of interim custody conditions. When the case went on appeal to the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the mother had already left for Ireland with the boy.

Proceedings Before the High Court:

The father made various applications, such as disclosure of the child's travel plans and video contact arrangements. Although the High Court only gave directions regarding the child's travel plans to a limited extent, it finally rejected the appeal by the father in October 2024 on the grounds of the father's historical failure to comply with conditions of custody and the fact that the child had been with the mother since 2017 without there being any evidence of neglect.

The Supreme Court's Decision:

Defying this, the father went before the Supreme Court but limited his petition to asking for virtual visitation rights and not custody. The Court acknowledged that both parents had manifested flaws but that at the end of the day, the child's welfare had to be the concern. Citing the stability of the child in Ireland, the Court decided that changing custody at this point would not be best for him.

But the bench emphasized that both parents must provide the child with love and guidance even if they are living apart. It recognized that living virtually was necessary for the child to maintain his attachment to his father.

Court's Directions:

The Supreme Court gave certain directions so that virtual interaction could be made possible:
  • The father shall be entitled to communicate with his son through video conferencing on every alternate Sunday between 10 a.m. and 12 noon (Ireland time) for two hours.
  • Both parents should assist each other in facilitating convenient and friendly goings-on during such calls.
  • Technical or logistical problems are to be settled mutually while considering the welfare of the child.
Conclusion:

With these guidelines, the Court weighed the realities of the child's current life overseas with his right to have consistent contact with his father. The decision upholds the principle that custody cases are not cases of parent-child conflicts but cases of ensuring the welfare and integrated development of the child.


Section 13, Hindu Marriage Act - 1955  

HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955  

Guardians and Wards Act, 1890